Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock Assessment Report for the Northern Sea Otter in Washington, 16688-16691 [2019-08056]
Download as PDF
16688
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2019 / Notices
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
OMB Control Number: 1652–0035.
Forms(s): DCA Access Standard
Security Program (DASSP).
Aircraft Operator Application Form.
Affected Public: GA aircraft operators
and passengers, ASOs, flight
crewmembers, fixed base operators, and
gateway airport operators.
Abstract: TSA is requesting an
extension of this information collection.
In accordance with 49 CFR part 1562,
subpart B, TSA requires GA aircraft
operators who wish to fly into or out of
DCA to designate a security coordinator
and adopt the DASSP. Once aircraft
operators have complied with the
DASSP requirements, they must request
a slot reservation from the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and
request authorization from TSA for each
flight into and out of DCA. This
information collection is approved
under OMB control number 1652–0033,
TSA Airspace Waiver Applications.
As part of the DASSP requirements,
individuals designated as security
coordinators, ASOs, and flight
crewmembers assigned to duty on a GA
aircraft flying into and out of DCA must
submit fingerprints for a Criminal
History Records Check (CHRC). In
addition, GA aircraft operators must
also maintain CHRC records of all
employees and authorized
representatives for whom a CHRC has
been completed.
Under the Armed Security Officer
Program, DASSP approved entities can
nominate candidates through an online
nomination form. Once approved by
TSA to participate, the candidates are
vetted for suitability for the program by
providing various application materials.
A law enforcement employment
verification check is then completed. In
addition, they are required to submit
their fingerprints so that a CHRC can be
conducted. Upon successful completion
of the application process, a final
determination of eligibility is
adjudicated. All qualified applicants
must then successfully complete a TSAapproved training course.
Number of Respondents: 160.
Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An
estimated 174 hours annually.
Dated: April 17, 2019.
Christina A. Walsh,
TSA Paperwork Reduction Act Officer,
Information Technology.
[FR Doc. 2019–08069 Filed 4–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–05–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:22 Apr 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R1–ES–2018–N091; FF01EWFW00–
FXES111601M000]
Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock
Assessment Report for the Northern
Sea Otter in Washington
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; response
to comments.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended, we, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, have revised our stock
assessment report for the northern sea
otter stock in the State of Washington.
We now make the final revised stock
assessment report available to the
public.
SUMMARY:
Document Availability: You
may obtain a copy of the stock
assessment report from our website at
https://www.fws.gov/wafwo.
Alternatively, you may contact the
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office,
510 Desmond Dr., Suite 102, Lacey, WA
98503; telephone: (360) 753–9440.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deanna Lynch, at the above street
address, by telephone (360) 753–9545),
or by email (deanna_lynch@fws.gov).
Persons who use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) may call the
Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We
announce the availability of the final
revised stock assessment report (SAR)
for the northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris
kenyoni) stock in the State of
Washington.
ADDRESSES:
Background
Under the Marine Mammal Protection
Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and its
implementing regulations in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR
part 18, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) regulates the taking;
import; and, under certain conditions,
possession; transportation; purchasing;
selling; and offering for sale, purchase,
or export, of marine mammals. One of
the goals of the MMPA is to ensure that
stocks of marine mammals occurring in
waters under U.S. jurisdiction do not
experience a level of human-caused
mortality and serious injury that is
likely to cause the stock to be reduced
below its optimum sustainable
population (OSP) level. OSP is defined
under the MMPA as ‘‘the number of
animals which will result in the
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
maximum productivity of the
population or the species, keeping in
mind the carrying capacity of the habitat
and the health of the ecosystem of
which they form a constituent element’’
(16 U.S.C. 1362(9)).
To help accomplish the goal of
maintaining marine mammal stocks at
their OSPs, section 117 of the MMPA
requires the Service and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to
prepare a SAR for each marine mammal
stock that occurs in waters under U.S.
jurisdiction. A SAR must be based on
the best scientific information available;
therefore, we prepare it in consultation
with established regional scientific
review groups established under 117(d)
of the MMPA. Each SAR must include:
1. A description of the stock and its
geographic range;
2. A minimum population estimate,
current and maximum net productivity
rate, and current population trend;
3. An estimate of the annual humancaused mortality and serious injury by
source and, for a strategic stock, other
factors that may be causing a decline or
impeding recovery of the stock;
4. A description of commercial fishery
interactions;
5. A categorization of the status of the
stock; and
6. An estimate of the potential
biological removal (PBR) level.
The MMPA defines the PBR as ‘‘the
maximum number of animals, not
including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal
stock while allowing that stock to reach
or maintain its [OSP]’’ (16 U.S.C.
1362(20)). The PBR is the product of the
minimum population estimate of the
stock (Nmin); one-half the maximum
theoretical or estimated net productivity
rate of the stock at a small population
size (Rmax); and a recovery factor (Fr) of
between 0.1 and 1.0, which is intended
to compensate for uncertainty and
unknown estimation errors. This can be
written as:
PBR = (Nmin)(1⁄2 of the Rmax)(Fr)
Section 117 of the MMPA also
requires the Service and NMFS to
review the SARs (a) at least annually for
stocks that are specified as strategic
stocks, (b) at least annually for stocks for
which significant new information is
available, and (c) at least once every 3
years for all other stocks. If our review
of the status of a stock indicates that it
has changed or may be more accurately
determined, then the SAR must be
revised accordingly.
A strategic stock is defined in the
MMPA as a marine mammal stock ‘‘(A)
for which the level of direct humancaused mortality exceeds the [PBR]
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
16689
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2019 / Notices
level; (B) which, based on the best
available scientific information, is
declining and is likely to be listed as a
threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, [as
amended] (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) [ESA],
within the foreseeable future; or (C)
which is listed as a threatened species
or endangered species under the [ESA],
or is designated as depleted under [the
MMPA]’’ 16 U.S.C. 1362(19).
Stock Assessment Report History for
the Northern Sea Otter in Washington
The Washington sea otter SAR was
last revised in August 2008. The
Washington sea otter is not a strategic
stock, thus the Service is required to
review the stock assessment at least
once every 3 years. The Service
reviewed the Washington sea otter SAR
in 2011 and concluded that a revision
was not warranted because the status of
the stock had not changed, nor could it
be more accurately determined.
However, upon review in 2016, the
Service determined that revision was
warranted because of changes in
population estimates and distribution.
Before releasing our draft SAR for
public review and comment, we
submitted it for technical review
internally and for scientific review by
the Pacific Regional Scientific Review
Group, which was established under the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1386(d)). In a January
17, 2018 (83 FR 2461), Federal Register
notice, we made our draft SAR available
for the MMPA-required 90-day public
review and comment period. Following
the close of the comment period, we
revised the SAR based on public
comments we received (see Response to
Public Comments) and prepared the
final revised SAR.
Summary of Final Revised Stock
Assessment Report for the Northern Sea
Otter in the State of Washington
The following table summarizes some
of the information contained in the final
revised SAR for northern sea otters in
Washington State, which includes the
stock’s Nmin, Rmax, Fr, PBR, annual
estimated human-caused mortality and
serious injury, and status.
SUMMARY—FINAL STOCK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE NORTHERN SEA OTTER IN WASHINGTON STATE
Stock
Nmin
Northern Sea Otter
(Washington State).
Rmax
1,806
0.20
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
Response to Public Comments
We received comments on the draft
revised SAR from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission) and the
Makah Tribe. We present substantive
issues raised in those comments that are
pertinent to the SAR, edited for brevity,
along with our responses below.
Comment 1: The Service should
conduct annual reviews of this SAR,
given the rapid population increase. In
addition, the annual reviews and OSP
analysis should be reviewed by, and
input incorporated from, the Pacific
Scientific Review Group (PSRG) before
the revised SAR is made available for
public review and comment, as required
by section 117 of the MMPA.
Response: As required in section
117(c) of the MMPA, the Service strives
to meet its statutory requirement of
reviewing the SAR for this non-strategic
stock every 3 years. If our review
indicates the status of the stock has
changed or can be more accurately
determined, the Service revises the SAR
in accordance with section 117(b),
which includes providing an
opportunity for public review and
consideration of advice offered by the
PSRG. However, prior to public
notification of the availability of a draft
revised SAR, the Service seeks input
from the PSRG to ensure it accurately
reflects the best scientific information
available at the time of preparation. In
addition, the Service updates the PSRG
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:22 Apr 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
Fr
Annual estimated humancaused mortality and
serious injury
PBR
0.1
18
on any new information and ongoing
studies during the PSRG’s annual
meetings.
The Service considers the ongoing
population increase of 9 percent per
year to be the population trajectory for
almost three decades and, as such, does
not represent significant new
information that would warrant a
review or revision on an annual basis.
We appreciate the commenter’s concern
over the time it takes for review and, if
warranted, subsequent revision of the
SAR but balance that concern with the
need to ensure our SAR accurately
reflects the best available science and is
subject to the public comment process.
Comment 2: The Service should
develop methods for estimating total
abundance of sea otters and associated
uncertainty to inform an Optimum
Sustainable Population (OSP) analysis
so that more accurate comparisons with
carrying capacity estimates can be
made.
Response: Although the Service has
provided funds to the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW) for conducting the annual
summer census (which at least provides
a minimum population estimate for
estimating the PBR), the Service does
not currently have the resources to
develop and implement a survey
method that would accurately estimate
the total abundance and associated
uncertainty for the Washington sea otter
stock. Such a survey would most likely
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Figures by specific
source, where known,
are provided in the
SAR.
Stock status
Non-Strategic.
be cost-prohibitive because it would
require considerably more flight and
staff time in order to cover the full
extent of the range where otters may
occur. Although a statistically rigorous
analysis to develop an estimate of
uncertainty could potentially be
developed, it would also require a
significant investment of resources
because development of a detection
function requires observer verification.
A detection function based on past
survey data would likely not be
appropriate for the following reasons:
(a) The number of ground stations
throughout the range in different habitat
types is not sufficient; (b) the ground
observers miss otters that are observed
by the aerial observer, and aerial photo
counts often are higher than ground
observer counts, further complicating
the ability to calculate the error; and (c)
since 1989, there has been one
consistent aerial observer, thus any
confidence interval developed for past
data may not be applicable to surveys
post-2019 when the current observer
will be retiring.
At this time, the Service does not
have a reliable estimate of carrying
capacity, and therefore, the Service has
not identified the OSP for the
Washington stock of northern sea otters.
The Service is aware of a Ph.D. student
out of the University of Washington
who is currently working on an updated
estimate of carrying capacity for
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
16690
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2019 / Notices
northern otters in Washington, which
may assist the Service in determining a
more appropriate lower end of the OSP
range (i.e., approximately 60 percent of
carrying capacity). This will allow the
Service to provide a more accurate
determination of the stock’s status
relative to OSP; however, because the
population continues to increase at 9
percent per year, we consider it unlikely
that the stock is at OSP. Also, see
response to Comment 5.
Comment 3: The Service should
revise the discussion of fisheries
information to indicate more precisely
the nature of the Makah fishery,
including the target species, where it is
active, and whether it is a commercial
fishery.
Response: NMFS (under the Secretary
of Commerce) has the responsibility
under MMPA section 118 for
development of the List of Fisheries.
NMFS’s regulations at 50 CFR 229.1(d)
state that those regulations do not apply
‘‘to Northwest treaty Indian tribal
members exercising treaty fishing
rights.’’ Therefore, NMFS does not
include the commercial fisheries
operated by Northwest treaty Indian
Tribes in the List of Fisheries. For
example, in the 2016 List of Fisheries
(81 FR 20550, April 8, 2016), Treaty
Indian fishing is specifically excluded
from the Washington Puget Sound
region and Washington Grays Harbor
salmon drift gillnet fisheries, which are
commercial fisheries in which Tribes
participate. The Makah Tribe’s marine
set-gillnet fishery is a commercial treaty
fishery and is included in the
Washington northern sea otter SAR in
that category accordingly. The fishing
areas where the fishery is active are also
included in this SAR, specifically Catch
Areas 4/4A/4B/5/6A/6C. The Service
does not have access to the number of
vessels participating in this fishery.
Landing information for fisheries in
these Catch Areas has been provided to
the Service for ESA consultations with
NMFS, but it does not break down the
information by Tribe or fishery (i.e.,
includes both drift and set gill nets), nor
does it include number of vessels.
We have reached out to NMFS to
obtain reports of incidental taking of sea
otters and have received no reports. Per
NMFS’ regulations, as mentioned above,
fisheries operated by Northwest treaty
Indian Tribal members exercising treaty
fishing rights are exempt and are thus
not subject to the reporting
requirements of MMPA section 118(e).
Unless a Tribe has their own regulations
that require reporting and those reports
are provided to NMFS and the Service,
we are not privy to any incidental take.
The Makah Tribe has provided
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:22 Apr 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
incidental take information directly to
the Service, per their regulations. Other
Tribes may have similar self-reporting
regulations regarding incidental catch of
marine mammals, but we have not
received reports from any other Tribe.
Comment 4: The Service should
consult with NMFS, Tribal authorities,
and other relevant groups to arrange for
the placement of observers aboard trap
and gillnet fishing vessels that may pose
a significant risk of incidentally taking
sea otters within their range in
Washington State.
Response: Under the MMPA, only
Category I and II fisheries are required
to accommodate an observer on board
their vessel(s). Category III fisheries are
generally not required to accommodate
observers aboard vessels due to the
remote likelihood of mortality and
serious injury of marine mammals. Any
request to place an observer on board a
vessel must originate from NMFS. The
Service does not have the authority to
request observers be placed aboard
fishing vessels. The fisheries that may
result in mortality or serious injury of
sea otters are either Tribal or Category
III fisheries, except for the Washington
coast Dungeness crab pot fishery, which
is a Category II fishery. In addition, the
pots are set and left and most of these
vessels are small and cannot
accommodate an observer on board.
While an observer program may
increase our opportunity to detect
bycatch, analyses indicate that high
levels of observer effort would be
required to avoid false-negative
conclusions, even if the rate of bycatch
mortality is substantial enough to
reduce the population growth rate
(Hatfield et al. 2011). The Service will
continue to work with the WDFW,
NMFS, and Tribes to explore options for
assessing sea otter bycatch, subject to
funding availability.
Comment 5: The commenter asserted
the recovery factor should be 0.75 or
higher for the following reasons: (a) The
SAR does not follow NMFS guidelines,
(b) a State listing status cannot be used
in the rationale for a recovery factor, (c)
the WDFW proposed to change the
State’s status from endangered to
threatened in February 2018, and (d) the
current (2017) estimate indicates the
population is approaching carrying
capacity and has attained OSP.
Response: The Service appreciates
and supports the efforts of NMFS in
developing their Office of Protected
Species Technical Memorandum and
the 2016 Guidelines for Preparing Stock
Assessment Reports. However, these
NMFS guidelines have not been adopted
by the Service, and, while we consider
the information contained within them
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to the extent applicable, they are not
binding on the Service.
The WDFW’s proposed change in
status (Sato 2018) was not available at
the time the SAR was developed nor
before the SAR was made available for
public comment, thus could not be
considered in this SAR. Regardless, the
recovery factor of 0.1 was not entirely
based on the State listing status. As was
recommended to the Service by the
PSRG, we relied on the Taylor et al.
(2003) factor for a small population
(consisting of between 1,500 and 7,500
individuals) that has an increasing
trend, but is considered vulnerable,
regardless of listing status. The
Washington sea otter stock is within the
range considered to be a small
population (whether or not a newer
population estimate is used) and is
considered to be vulnerable because of
their restricted range making more than
50 percent of the stock vulnerable to a
potential catastrophe, such as an oil
spill, at any point in time. Therefore, the
Service continues to agree with the
recommendation made by the PSRG to
use a recovery factor of 0.1.
A carrying capacity estimate was
produced by Laidre et al. (2011);
however, the Service does not consider
this to be a viable estimate for the full
range of this stock for the following
reasons:
(1) This carrying capacity estimate
relied on population density estimates
associated with rocky habitat in
Washington where the population has
continued to grow at about 5 percent per
year.
(2) Laidre et al. (2011) relied upon
density estimates developed for
southern sea otters for the mixed and
sandy habitat in Washington. This is not
an appropriate density estimate to apply
because southern sea otters are food
limited, whereas Washington sea otters
are not. An appropriate carrying
capacity estimate for Washington sea
otters needs to be based on food
availability within the different habitat
types that occur in Washington.
(3) Some areas that Laidre et al. (2011)
delineated as rocky habitat should have
been delineated as mixed or sandy,
within which a more appropriate
density estimate should be applied.
(4) Subsequent to the data relied upon
by Laidre et al. (2011), exponential
population growth has occurred within
the areas that are primarily mixed and
sandy habitat types. This type of
population growth is not an indicator
that a population is approaching
carrying capacity.
(5) Because there is evidence that
Washington sea otters move around
within their range more than otters in
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2019 / Notices
other stocks, basing a density estimate
on a population estimate taken only
once per year may not provide a
realistic evaluation of the use of the
habitat. Although Laidre et al. (2011)
provided a total carrying capacity
estimate of 1,854 sea otters for this
stock, this is not a good representation
of the number of otters the habitat in
Washington is capable of supporting. In
addition, the rate at which the
Washington sea otter population is
increasing (i.e., average rate of 9 percent
per year 1989 to 2016) indicates the
stock has not reached it’s carrying
capacity. Without an updated estimate
of carrying capacity, the status of the
Washington sea otter stock relative to
OSP cannot be determined at this time;
however, because the population is
increasing at such a significant rate, it
is unlikely to be at OSP.
Thus, the Service has retained the
recovery factor of 0.1 in the revised
SAR. As new information becomes
available, the Service may reevaluate
our recovery factor in future revisions.
Comment 6: Table 1 should reflect the
most recent data available. In addition,
the specific references to the Makah
Tribe should be removed and all Tribal
information be referred to as ‘‘treaty
tribal fisheries.’’
Response: The SAR covers the time
period of 2011–2015/2016, which
includes data available at the time the
SAR was revised. As indicated in
response to Comment 1, the process for
review and revision of a SAR can take
a considerable amount of time even
before making it available for public
comment. If the Service were to update
the SAR to include data outside the time
period provided in the draft revised
SAR, the changes would be significant
enough to require republication of a
new draft revised SAR and, thus, the
process would begin again. This could
perpetually delay finalization of the
SAR. Instead, the next revision of the
SAR will include the more recent data.
Per section 117(a)(4) of the MMPA,
the Service is required to describe the
commercial fisheries that interact with
the stock. The Northern Washington
Marine Set Gillnet Fishery is a
commercial fishery that reported sea
otter takes during the time period
included in the SAR and, therefore,
must be included in Table 1. We have
changed reference to the fishery being a
‘‘Makah fishery’’ to a ‘‘Tribal fishery’’
and have removed line 1 referencing
Areas 4/4A from the table as there was
no active fishery in these areas during
the time period of this SAR.
Comment 7: Speculation about the
possibility that sea otters could be
trapped in crab fishing pots should be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:22 Apr 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
removed from the SAR. There is no
direct evidence of mortality in
Washington, and any mortalities would
have been documented in social media.
Circumstantial evidence indicates that,
if any mortality is occurring, it is very
minor and is not impacting the
population.
Response: As discussed in the SAR,
the data we relied upon was not based
on experimental efforts. There is direct
evidence of sea otters in California and
Alaska being trapped and drowned in
crab pot gear that is identical to gear
used within the range of the sea otter in
Washington, and we cannot be sure that
all otters that become trapped and
subsequently die will be reported via
social media. The assumption that the
population would not be growing at its
current rate if it was experiencing
mortality in the crab fishery is not
necessarily accurate. While it appears
that the population is growing at 20
percent in the southern portion of the
range, the population as a whole is
growing at 9 percent. A significant
number of pups continues to be
documented in the northern portion of
the range, and it is more likely that the
growth in the south is being
supplemented by births in the northern
portion. Finally, both the PSRG and
Commission have recommended that we
include the information regarding the
unknowns in the SAR.
Comment 8: The section on ‘‘Harvest
by Northwest treaty Indian Tribes’’ does
not belong in the SAR and should be
removed as it does not follow NMFS
guidelines.
Response: As stated in our response to
Comment 5, the NMFS guidelines have
not been adopted and are not binding on
the Service. Section 117 of the MMPA
provides the essential elements that
should be addressed in a SAR; however,
the Service is not precluded from
including other items as it sees fit. As
this stock is subject to potential harvest
by Tribes that the Service does not
consider exempt under MMPA, the
Service believes it is necessary to
include this statement in our document.
Comment 9: The mortality rate
information in the SAR does not reflect
the best available science and is
inconsistent with the SAR guidelines
developed by NMFS. In particular, the
SAR does not provide a conclusion on
whether the total fishery mortality and
serious injury rate is approaching a zero
mortality and serious injury rate.
Response: Section 117(a)(3) requires
that the Service provide an estimate of
all human-caused mortality and serious
injury. While our data are limited due
to lack of observer coverage and
uncertainties, we have based our
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16691
estimate on the best data available,
including beach-cast carcasses that
represent other sources of humancaused mortality. We clearly indicate
that the minimum level of all human
caused mortality and serious injury is at
least one sea otter per year and may be
higher. Although the known humancaused mortality and serious injury is
less than PBR, we are unable to
definitively state that the total mortality
and serious injury of sea otters due to
human-caused mortalities and serious
injuries is insignificant and approaching
a zero mortality and serious injury rate
because of the lack of observer data for
commercial fisheries that may interact
with sea otters.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
Dated: April 3, 2019.
Margaret E. Everson,
Principal Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service Exercising the Authority of
the Director for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–08056 Filed 4–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS–NCR–WHHO–SSB–NPS0027381;
PPNCWHHOP0, PPMVSIE1Z.I00000 (199);
OMB Control Number 1024–0277]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; National Park Service
President’s Park National Christmas
Tree Music Program Application
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice of information collection;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we,
the National Park Service (NPS) are
proposing to renew an information
collection.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before June 21,
2019.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments on
this information collection request (ICR)
by mail to Phadrea Ponds, acting NPS
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, 1201 Oakridge Drive, Fort
Collins, CO 80525, by email at phadrea_
ponds@nps.gov, or by telephone at 970–
267–7231. Please reference OMB
Control Number 1024–0277 in the
subject line of your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request additional information about
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 77 (Monday, April 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16688-16691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08056]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R1-ES-2018-N091; FF01EWFW00-FXES111601M000]
Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock Assessment Report for the
Northern Sea Otter in Washington
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have revised our
stock assessment report for the northern sea otter stock in the State
of Washington. We now make the final revised stock assessment report
available to the public.
ADDRESSES: Document Availability: You may obtain a copy of the stock
assessment report from our website at https://www.fws.gov/wafwo.
Alternatively, you may contact the Washington Fish and Wildlife Office,
510 Desmond Dr., Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503; telephone: (360) 753-9440.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deanna Lynch, at the above street
address, by telephone (360) 753-9545), or by email
([email protected]). Persons who use a telecommunications device for
the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We announce the availability of the final
revised stock assessment report (SAR) for the northern sea otter
(Enhydra lutris kenyoni) stock in the State of Washington.
Background
Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA;
16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and its implementing regulations in the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR part 18, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) regulates the taking; import; and, under
certain conditions, possession; transportation; purchasing; selling;
and offering for sale, purchase, or export, of marine mammals. One of
the goals of the MMPA is to ensure that stocks of marine mammals
occurring in waters under U.S. jurisdiction do not experience a level
of human-caused mortality and serious injury that is likely to cause
the stock to be reduced below its optimum sustainable population (OSP)
level. OSP is defined under the MMPA as ``the number of animals which
will result in the maximum productivity of the population or the
species, keeping in mind the carrying capacity of the habitat and the
health of the ecosystem of which they form a constituent element'' (16
U.S.C. 1362(9)).
To help accomplish the goal of maintaining marine mammal stocks at
their OSPs, section 117 of the MMPA requires the Service and the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to prepare a SAR for each
marine mammal stock that occurs in waters under U.S. jurisdiction. A
SAR must be based on the best scientific information available;
therefore, we prepare it in consultation with established regional
scientific review groups established under 117(d) of the MMPA. Each SAR
must include:
1. A description of the stock and its geographic range;
2. A minimum population estimate, current and maximum net
productivity rate, and current population trend;
3. An estimate of the annual human-caused mortality and serious
injury by source and, for a strategic stock, other factors that may be
causing a decline or impeding recovery of the stock;
4. A description of commercial fishery interactions;
5. A categorization of the status of the stock; and
6. An estimate of the potential biological removal (PBR) level.
The MMPA defines the PBR as ``the maximum number of animals, not
including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal
stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its [OSP]'' (16
U.S.C. 1362(20)). The PBR is the product of the minimum population
estimate of the stock (Nmin); one-half the maximum
theoretical or estimated net productivity rate of the stock at a small
population size (Rmax); and a recovery factor
(Fr) of between 0.1 and 1.0, which is intended to compensate
for uncertainty and unknown estimation errors. This can be written as:
PBR = (Nmin)(\1/2\ of the Rmax)(Fr)
Section 117 of the MMPA also requires the Service and NMFS to
review the SARs (a) at least annually for stocks that are specified as
strategic stocks, (b) at least annually for stocks for which
significant new information is available, and (c) at least once every 3
years for all other stocks. If our review of the status of a stock
indicates that it has changed or may be more accurately determined,
then the SAR must be revised accordingly.
A strategic stock is defined in the MMPA as a marine mammal stock
``(A) for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds the
[PBR]
[[Page 16689]]
level; (B) which, based on the best available scientific information,
is declining and is likely to be listed as a threatened species under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, [as amended] (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) [ESA], within the foreseeable future; or (C) which is listed as a
threatened species or endangered species under the [ESA], or is
designated as depleted under [the MMPA]'' 16 U.S.C. 1362(19).
Stock Assessment Report History for the Northern Sea Otter in
Washington
The Washington sea otter SAR was last revised in August 2008. The
Washington sea otter is not a strategic stock, thus the Service is
required to review the stock assessment at least once every 3 years.
The Service reviewed the Washington sea otter SAR in 2011 and concluded
that a revision was not warranted because the status of the stock had
not changed, nor could it be more accurately determined. However, upon
review in 2016, the Service determined that revision was warranted
because of changes in population estimates and distribution.
Before releasing our draft SAR for public review and comment, we
submitted it for technical review internally and for scientific review
by the Pacific Regional Scientific Review Group, which was established
under the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1386(d)). In a January 17, 2018 (83 FR 2461),
Federal Register notice, we made our draft SAR available for the MMPA-
required 90-day public review and comment period. Following the close
of the comment period, we revised the SAR based on public comments we
received (see Response to Public Comments) and prepared the final
revised SAR.
Summary of Final Revised Stock Assessment Report for the Northern Sea
Otter in the State of Washington
The following table summarizes some of the information contained in
the final revised SAR for northern sea otters in Washington State,
which includes the stock's Nmin, Rmax,
Fr, PBR, annual estimated human-caused mortality and serious
injury, and status.
Summary--Final Stock Assessment Report for the Northern Sea Otter in Washington State
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual estimated
human-caused
Stock Nmin Rmax Fr PBR mortality and serious Stock status
injury
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern Sea Otter (Washington 1,806 0.20 0.1 18 Figures by specific Non-Strategic.
State). source, where known,
are provided in the
SAR.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response to Public Comments
We received comments on the draft revised SAR from the Marine
Mammal Commission (Commission) and the Makah Tribe. We present
substantive issues raised in those comments that are pertinent to the
SAR, edited for brevity, along with our responses below.
Comment 1: The Service should conduct annual reviews of this SAR,
given the rapid population increase. In addition, the annual reviews
and OSP analysis should be reviewed by, and input incorporated from,
the Pacific Scientific Review Group (PSRG) before the revised SAR is
made available for public review and comment, as required by section
117 of the MMPA.
Response: As required in section 117(c) of the MMPA, the Service
strives to meet its statutory requirement of reviewing the SAR for this
non-strategic stock every 3 years. If our review indicates the status
of the stock has changed or can be more accurately determined, the
Service revises the SAR in accordance with section 117(b), which
includes providing an opportunity for public review and consideration
of advice offered by the PSRG. However, prior to public notification of
the availability of a draft revised SAR, the Service seeks input from
the PSRG to ensure it accurately reflects the best scientific
information available at the time of preparation. In addition, the
Service updates the PSRG on any new information and ongoing studies
during the PSRG's annual meetings.
The Service considers the ongoing population increase of 9 percent
per year to be the population trajectory for almost three decades and,
as such, does not represent significant new information that would
warrant a review or revision on an annual basis. We appreciate the
commenter's concern over the time it takes for review and, if
warranted, subsequent revision of the SAR but balance that concern with
the need to ensure our SAR accurately reflects the best available
science and is subject to the public comment process.
Comment 2: The Service should develop methods for estimating total
abundance of sea otters and associated uncertainty to inform an Optimum
Sustainable Population (OSP) analysis so that more accurate comparisons
with carrying capacity estimates can be made.
Response: Although the Service has provided funds to the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) for conducting the annual summer
census (which at least provides a minimum population estimate for
estimating the PBR), the Service does not currently have the resources
to develop and implement a survey method that would accurately estimate
the total abundance and associated uncertainty for the Washington sea
otter stock. Such a survey would most likely be cost-prohibitive
because it would require considerably more flight and staff time in
order to cover the full extent of the range where otters may occur.
Although a statistically rigorous analysis to develop an estimate of
uncertainty could potentially be developed, it would also require a
significant investment of resources because development of a detection
function requires observer verification. A detection function based on
past survey data would likely not be appropriate for the following
reasons: (a) The number of ground stations throughout the range in
different habitat types is not sufficient; (b) the ground observers
miss otters that are observed by the aerial observer, and aerial photo
counts often are higher than ground observer counts, further
complicating the ability to calculate the error; and (c) since 1989,
there has been one consistent aerial observer, thus any confidence
interval developed for past data may not be applicable to surveys post-
2019 when the current observer will be retiring.
At this time, the Service does not have a reliable estimate of
carrying capacity, and therefore, the Service has not identified the
OSP for the Washington stock of northern sea otters. The Service is
aware of a Ph.D. student out of the University of Washington who is
currently working on an updated estimate of carrying capacity for
[[Page 16690]]
northern otters in Washington, which may assist the Service in
determining a more appropriate lower end of the OSP range (i.e.,
approximately 60 percent of carrying capacity). This will allow the
Service to provide a more accurate determination of the stock's status
relative to OSP; however, because the population continues to increase
at 9 percent per year, we consider it unlikely that the stock is at
OSP. Also, see response to Comment 5.
Comment 3: The Service should revise the discussion of fisheries
information to indicate more precisely the nature of the Makah fishery,
including the target species, where it is active, and whether it is a
commercial fishery.
Response: NMFS (under the Secretary of Commerce) has the
responsibility under MMPA section 118 for development of the List of
Fisheries. NMFS's regulations at 50 CFR 229.1(d) state that those
regulations do not apply ``to Northwest treaty Indian tribal members
exercising treaty fishing rights.'' Therefore, NMFS does not include
the commercial fisheries operated by Northwest treaty Indian Tribes in
the List of Fisheries. For example, in the 2016 List of Fisheries (81
FR 20550, April 8, 2016), Treaty Indian fishing is specifically
excluded from the Washington Puget Sound region and Washington Grays
Harbor salmon drift gillnet fisheries, which are commercial fisheries
in which Tribes participate. The Makah Tribe's marine set-gillnet
fishery is a commercial treaty fishery and is included in the
Washington northern sea otter SAR in that category accordingly. The
fishing areas where the fishery is active are also included in this
SAR, specifically Catch Areas 4/4A/4B/5/6A/6C. The Service does not
have access to the number of vessels participating in this fishery.
Landing information for fisheries in these Catch Areas has been
provided to the Service for ESA consultations with NMFS, but it does
not break down the information by Tribe or fishery (i.e., includes both
drift and set gill nets), nor does it include number of vessels.
We have reached out to NMFS to obtain reports of incidental taking
of sea otters and have received no reports. Per NMFS' regulations, as
mentioned above, fisheries operated by Northwest treaty Indian Tribal
members exercising treaty fishing rights are exempt and are thus not
subject to the reporting requirements of MMPA section 118(e). Unless a
Tribe has their own regulations that require reporting and those
reports are provided to NMFS and the Service, we are not privy to any
incidental take. The Makah Tribe has provided incidental take
information directly to the Service, per their regulations. Other
Tribes may have similar self-reporting regulations regarding incidental
catch of marine mammals, but we have not received reports from any
other Tribe.
Comment 4: The Service should consult with NMFS, Tribal
authorities, and other relevant groups to arrange for the placement of
observers aboard trap and gillnet fishing vessels that may pose a
significant risk of incidentally taking sea otters within their range
in Washington State.
Response: Under the MMPA, only Category I and II fisheries are
required to accommodate an observer on board their vessel(s). Category
III fisheries are generally not required to accommodate observers
aboard vessels due to the remote likelihood of mortality and serious
injury of marine mammals. Any request to place an observer on board a
vessel must originate from NMFS. The Service does not have the
authority to request observers be placed aboard fishing vessels. The
fisheries that may result in mortality or serious injury of sea otters
are either Tribal or Category III fisheries, except for the Washington
coast Dungeness crab pot fishery, which is a Category II fishery. In
addition, the pots are set and left and most of these vessels are small
and cannot accommodate an observer on board. While an observer program
may increase our opportunity to detect bycatch, analyses indicate that
high levels of observer effort would be required to avoid false-
negative conclusions, even if the rate of bycatch mortality is
substantial enough to reduce the population growth rate (Hatfield et
al. 2011). The Service will continue to work with the WDFW, NMFS, and
Tribes to explore options for assessing sea otter bycatch, subject to
funding availability.
Comment 5: The commenter asserted the recovery factor should be
0.75 or higher for the following reasons: (a) The SAR does not follow
NMFS guidelines, (b) a State listing status cannot be used in the
rationale for a recovery factor, (c) the WDFW proposed to change the
State's status from endangered to threatened in February 2018, and (d)
the current (2017) estimate indicates the population is approaching
carrying capacity and has attained OSP.
Response: The Service appreciates and supports the efforts of NMFS
in developing their Office of Protected Species Technical Memorandum
and the 2016 Guidelines for Preparing Stock Assessment Reports.
However, these NMFS guidelines have not been adopted by the Service,
and, while we consider the information contained within them to the
extent applicable, they are not binding on the Service.
The WDFW's proposed change in status (Sato 2018) was not available
at the time the SAR was developed nor before the SAR was made available
for public comment, thus could not be considered in this SAR.
Regardless, the recovery factor of 0.1 was not entirely based on the
State listing status. As was recommended to the Service by the PSRG, we
relied on the Taylor et al. (2003) factor for a small population
(consisting of between 1,500 and 7,500 individuals) that has an
increasing trend, but is considered vulnerable, regardless of listing
status. The Washington sea otter stock is within the range considered
to be a small population (whether or not a newer population estimate is
used) and is considered to be vulnerable because of their restricted
range making more than 50 percent of the stock vulnerable to a
potential catastrophe, such as an oil spill, at any point in time.
Therefore, the Service continues to agree with the recommendation made
by the PSRG to use a recovery factor of 0.1.
A carrying capacity estimate was produced by Laidre et al. (2011);
however, the Service does not consider this to be a viable estimate for
the full range of this stock for the following reasons:
(1) This carrying capacity estimate relied on population density
estimates associated with rocky habitat in Washington where the
population has continued to grow at about 5 percent per year.
(2) Laidre et al. (2011) relied upon density estimates developed
for southern sea otters for the mixed and sandy habitat in Washington.
This is not an appropriate density estimate to apply because southern
sea otters are food limited, whereas Washington sea otters are not. An
appropriate carrying capacity estimate for Washington sea otters needs
to be based on food availability within the different habitat types
that occur in Washington.
(3) Some areas that Laidre et al. (2011) delineated as rocky
habitat should have been delineated as mixed or sandy, within which a
more appropriate density estimate should be applied.
(4) Subsequent to the data relied upon by Laidre et al. (2011),
exponential population growth has occurred within the areas that are
primarily mixed and sandy habitat types. This type of population growth
is not an indicator that a population is approaching carrying capacity.
(5) Because there is evidence that Washington sea otters move
around within their range more than otters in
[[Page 16691]]
other stocks, basing a density estimate on a population estimate taken
only once per year may not provide a realistic evaluation of the use of
the habitat. Although Laidre et al. (2011) provided a total carrying
capacity estimate of 1,854 sea otters for this stock, this is not a
good representation of the number of otters the habitat in Washington
is capable of supporting. In addition, the rate at which the Washington
sea otter population is increasing (i.e., average rate of 9 percent per
year 1989 to 2016) indicates the stock has not reached it's carrying
capacity. Without an updated estimate of carrying capacity, the status
of the Washington sea otter stock relative to OSP cannot be determined
at this time; however, because the population is increasing at such a
significant rate, it is unlikely to be at OSP.
Thus, the Service has retained the recovery factor of 0.1 in the
revised SAR. As new information becomes available, the Service may
reevaluate our recovery factor in future revisions.
Comment 6: Table 1 should reflect the most recent data available.
In addition, the specific references to the Makah Tribe should be
removed and all Tribal information be referred to as ``treaty tribal
fisheries.''
Response: The SAR covers the time period of 2011-2015/2016, which
includes data available at the time the SAR was revised. As indicated
in response to Comment 1, the process for review and revision of a SAR
can take a considerable amount of time even before making it available
for public comment. If the Service were to update the SAR to include
data outside the time period provided in the draft revised SAR, the
changes would be significant enough to require republication of a new
draft revised SAR and, thus, the process would begin again. This could
perpetually delay finalization of the SAR. Instead, the next revision
of the SAR will include the more recent data.
Per section 117(a)(4) of the MMPA, the Service is required to
describe the commercial fisheries that interact with the stock. The
Northern Washington Marine Set Gillnet Fishery is a commercial fishery
that reported sea otter takes during the time period included in the
SAR and, therefore, must be included in Table 1. We have changed
reference to the fishery being a ``Makah fishery'' to a ``Tribal
fishery'' and have removed line 1 referencing Areas 4/4A from the table
as there was no active fishery in these areas during the time period of
this SAR.
Comment 7: Speculation about the possibility that sea otters could
be trapped in crab fishing pots should be removed from the SAR. There
is no direct evidence of mortality in Washington, and any mortalities
would have been documented in social media. Circumstantial evidence
indicates that, if any mortality is occurring, it is very minor and is
not impacting the population.
Response: As discussed in the SAR, the data we relied upon was not
based on experimental efforts. There is direct evidence of sea otters
in California and Alaska being trapped and drowned in crab pot gear
that is identical to gear used within the range of the sea otter in
Washington, and we cannot be sure that all otters that become trapped
and subsequently die will be reported via social media. The assumption
that the population would not be growing at its current rate if it was
experiencing mortality in the crab fishery is not necessarily accurate.
While it appears that the population is growing at 20 percent in the
southern portion of the range, the population as a whole is growing at
9 percent. A significant number of pups continues to be documented in
the northern portion of the range, and it is more likely that the
growth in the south is being supplemented by births in the northern
portion. Finally, both the PSRG and Commission have recommended that we
include the information regarding the unknowns in the SAR.
Comment 8: The section on ``Harvest by Northwest treaty Indian
Tribes'' does not belong in the SAR and should be removed as it does
not follow NMFS guidelines.
Response: As stated in our response to Comment 5, the NMFS
guidelines have not been adopted and are not binding on the Service.
Section 117 of the MMPA provides the essential elements that should be
addressed in a SAR; however, the Service is not precluded from
including other items as it sees fit. As this stock is subject to
potential harvest by Tribes that the Service does not consider exempt
under MMPA, the Service believes it is necessary to include this
statement in our document.
Comment 9: The mortality rate information in the SAR does not
reflect the best available science and is inconsistent with the SAR
guidelines developed by NMFS. In particular, the SAR does not provide a
conclusion on whether the total fishery mortality and serious injury
rate is approaching a zero mortality and serious injury rate.
Response: Section 117(a)(3) requires that the Service provide an
estimate of all human-caused mortality and serious injury. While our
data are limited due to lack of observer coverage and uncertainties, we
have based our estimate on the best data available, including beach-
cast carcasses that represent other sources of human-caused mortality.
We clearly indicate that the minimum level of all human caused
mortality and serious injury is at least one sea otter per year and may
be higher. Although the known human-caused mortality and serious injury
is less than PBR, we are unable to definitively state that the total
mortality and serious injury of sea otters due to human-caused
mortalities and serious injuries is insignificant and approaching a
zero mortality and serious injury rate because of the lack of observer
data for commercial fisheries that may interact with sea otters.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Marine Mammal Protection Act
of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
Dated: April 3, 2019.
Margaret E. Everson,
Principal Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Exercising
the Authority of the Director for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-08056 Filed 4-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P